Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/12/09

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Digital Module R sensor vs EOS 1D IIS
From: schroter at optonline.net (Andrew Schroter)
Date: Thu Dec 9 06:53:50 2004
References: <F4B5127A-48A2-11D9-8C8E-000A95C33F68@dodo.com.au> <000701c4dcb2$128fcd40$87d86c18@ted> <72D47406-48A7-11D9-8C8E-000A95C33F68@dodo.com.au> <34FC46B2-48ED-11D9-B77C-0003938C439E@btinternet.com> <002d01c4dd39$30e5afd0$87d86c18@ted> <41B78A4A.3010901@summaventures.com>

Please remember folks, a Leica or Leeica imitation camera is merely the
holder for Leica glass.  It's the glass, Stupid.  there aren't lots of other
mothers with pretty daughters when it comes to lenses.
AGS
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Peter Dzwig" <pdzwig@summaventures.com>
To: "Leica Users Group" <lug@leica-users.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 6:12 PM
Subject: Re: [Leica] Digital Module R sensor vs EOS 1D IIS


> Ted Grant wrote:
> >
> > Sorry folks a long rant, but I hate it when a company I've supported
> > buying multi thousands and thousands of dollars, using and promoting
> > their equipment for 50 years and they cant get their act together, tell
> > the truth or are flailing around lost in a world of yesterday while the
> > space age speed of other companies pasted them by completely.
> >
> > And quite frankly it's highly unlikely they'll ever catch the pack.
Maybe?
> > ted
>
> Ted,
>
> Leica's fundamental problem is its lack of a serious long range technology
> research group. It seems from all that I hear that they can design lenses
;-)
> but what they don't seem to be able to do is to look at technology in the
longer
> term and make accurate predictions as to where things are going. They did
it
> ONCE with OB and the original Leica concept, but they appear not to have
been
> able to follow on. OK the M3 is an exception. A lot of what I see on this
list
> is people bemoaning how far Leica are behind the curve.
>
> Leica itself is caught in a dichotomy. The current pace of technological
change
> is so rapid that it is fundamentally incompatible with Leica's way of
doing
> things. Yet Leica needs new product.
>
> My guess is that the present shareholder structure wouldn't or won't
invest in
> long-term research. The only way out is not to play the game in the same
way.
> Leica *must* take a long hard look at current and future technology,
assess
> where it needs to be and come up with a new approach which puts them back
in
> their hard-won and rightful place.
>
> In the meantime? Licence technology from the likes of Epson (for example)
mate
> it to M lenses and produce a product which will sell well, in reasonable
volume
> and at a reasonable price.
>
> Just my .02
>
> Peter Dzwig
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>



In reply to: Message from rdcb37 at dodo.com.au (Rick Dykstra) ([Leica] Digital Module R sensor vs EOS 1D IIS)
Message from tedgrant at shaw.ca (Ted Grant) ([Leica] Digital Module R sensor vs EOS 1D IIS)
Message from rdcb37 at dodo.com.au (Rick Dykstra) ([Leica] Digital Module R sensor vs EOS 1D IIS)
Message from Frank.Dernie at btinternet.com (Frank Dernie) ([Leica] Digital Module R sensor vs EOS 1D IIS)
Message from tedgrant at shaw.ca (Ted Grant) ([Leica] Digital Module R sensor vs EOS 1D IIS)
Message from pdzwig at summaventures.com (Peter Dzwig) ([Leica] Digital Module R sensor vs EOS 1D IIS)